On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 08:20 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > I suspect there are detailed studies on this done by usability > > researchers, somewhere out there. of course, there are tensions; it's > > hard (well, impossible) to design a complex interface with defaults that > > are correct for all uses by all users. but you have to take into account > > the tendency for people not to discover useful but non-necessary > > enhancements that are not enabled by default, when you're deciding on > > your defaults, and try to accommodate it where this doesn't lead to > > egregious horribleness. > > And the 'egregious' is the part I have a problem with. > > Worst case scenario - someone doesn't like updating as much. > > That's the WORST case. > > hardly egregious. um, my point was that normally in this kind of case - you've come up with a neat little improvement - you look at it the other way round: not how horrible will it be if you don't enable the improvement by default (the answer to which is almost always 'not very', because such a case just equates to the existing situation - so it's more or less a meaningless question); you look at how bad things could possibly get if you _do_ enable it by default. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
